[boost] Re: Math Constants Formal Review - ()s are a key issue.

From: Daniel Frey (daniel.frey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-18 05:14:45

Gennaro Prota wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 09:47:50 +0200, Daniel Frey
> <daniel.frey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
>>Paul A Bristow wrote:
>>
>>>I am confident that your system also generates efficient code using an
>>>efficient compiler.
>>>But have you considered or tried debugging?
>>
>>Currently, I don't have time for that. Maybe at the weekend, but I can't 
>>promise. But I agree that it should be verified in practice.
> 
> What should be verified?

How efficient different compilers work with the template-approach I 
showed. I'll try to do that for the GCC 2.95 / 3.x and for the Intel 
compiler (v7) at the weekend, but my experience with reading 
x86-assembler is limited, so maybe I'll just run some benchmarks. As I 
don't have/use Windows, I can't verify compilers for this platform.

>>What I'd also like to hear is opinions from others here on the list. 
>>What do you think?
> 
> FWIW, I agree with everything you've said (except, maybe, the comment
> about debugging above). The arguments that Paul gives for his
> approach(es) are something beyond me.

Thanks. For the arguments that Paul gives, I'd also welcome comments 
from the people that gave these arguments from their work/environment. I 
still think that this shouldn't be ignored, but I just don't really 
understand the reasons and I'd like to see these people comment on the 
code I showed.

Regards, Daniel

-- 
Daniel Frey
aixigo AG - financial training, research and technology
Schloß-Rahe-Straße 15, 52072 Aachen, Germany
fon: [phone], fax: [phone]
eMail: daniel.frey_at_[hidden], web: http://www.aixigo.de